Design notes for seismic assessment

of existing structure in accordance

to EUROCODE 8-PART 3
VALENTINOS NEOPHYTOU BEng (Hons), MSc

REVISION 1: January, 2014

ABOUT THIS DOCUMENT

This publication provides a concise compilation of selected rules in the Eurocode 8 Part 1 &
3, together with relevant Cyprus National Annex, that relate to the seismic design of
common forms of concrete building structure in the South Europe. Rules from EN 1998-3
for global analysis, type of analysis and verification checks are presented. Detail design
check rules for concrete beam, column and shear wall, from EN 1998-3 are also presented.
This guide covers the assessment of orthodox members in concrete frames. It does not cover
design rules for steel frames. Certain practical limitations are given to the scope.

Due to time constraints and knowledge, I may not be able to address the whole issues.

Please send me your suggestions for improvement. Anyone interested to share his/her
knowledge or willing to contribute either totally a new section about Eurocode 8-3 or within
this section is encouraged.

For further details:

My LinkedIn Profile:

http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=125833097&trk=hb_tab_pro_top

Email: valentinos_n@hotmail.com

Slideshare Account: http://www.slideshare.net/ValentinosNeophytou

 Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3

FUNDAMENTAL REQUIREMENT – LIMIT STATE (LS)

(EN1998-3,cl.2.1)
Combination
Probability of
Mean return of action and
Limit state exceedance in Description
period in years performance
50 years
levels
The structure is heavily damaged, with low
TR = 2475
(Vary Rare 2% 2475/NCS residual lateral strength and stiffness,
Earthquake) although vertical elements are still capable
of sustaining vertical loads. Most non-
Near TR = 475
(Rare 10% 475/NC structural components have collapsed. Large
Collapse (NC)
Earthquake) permanent drifts are present. The structure
is near collapse and would probably not
TR = 225
(Frequent 20% 225/NC survive another earthquake, even of
Earthquake) moderate intensity.
The structure is significantly damaged, with
TR = 2475
(Vary Rare 2% 2475/SD some residual lateral strength and stiffness,

Significant Earthquake) and vertical elements are capable of

Damage (SD) sustaining vertical loads. Non-structural

TR = 475 components are damaged, although
(Rare 10% 475/SD
Earthquake) partitions and infills have not failed out-of-

Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc Page 3 of 61

 Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3

plane. Moderate permanent drifts are

TR = 225 present. The structure can sustain after-
(Frequent 20% 225/SD
shocks of moderate intensity. The structure
Earthquake)
is likely to be uneconomic to repair.
The structure is only lightly damaged, with
TR = 2475
(Vary Rare 2% 2475/DL structural elements prevented from
Earthquake) significant yielding and retaining their
strength and stiffness properties. Non-
Damage TR = 475 structural components, such as partitions
Limitation (Rare 10% 475/DL
Earthquake) and infills, may show distributed cracking,
(DL)
but the damage could be economically
TR = 225 repaired. Permanent drifts are negligible.
(Frequent 20% 225/DL The structure does not need any repair
Earthquake)
measures.
Note 1: TR values above same as for new buildings. National authorities may select lower values, and require compliance with only two limit-
states.
Note 2: The acceptable performance level for ordinary buildings of importance should be “Significant Damage” which is roughly equivalent with
the “No Collapse” in EN1998-1.

Note 3: The National Authorities decide whether all three Limit States shall be checked, or two of them, or just one of them.

Note 4: The performance levels for which the three Limit States should be met are chosen either nationally through the National Annex to this
part of Eurocode 8, or by the owner if the country leaves the choice open.

Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc Page 4 of 61

Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3

Performance Levels and Limit States

Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc Page 5 of 61

Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3

PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS AND COMPLIANCE CRITERIA

(EN1998-1-1,cl.2.1)

Return-period ground motion in TR years

Value of the exponent, k k=3 EN19981-1,cl.2.1(4)

−1/𝑘
Importance factor based on 𝑇𝐿𝑅
𝛾𝐼 = EN19981-1,cl.2.1(4)
reference seismic action 𝑇𝐿

Importance factor based on

−1/𝑘
𝑃𝐿
reference probability of 𝛾𝐼 = EN19981-1,cl.2.1(4)
𝑃𝐿𝑅
exceeding the seismic action

𝑇𝐿
Mean return period 𝑇𝑅 = − EN1998-1-1,cl.2.1(1)
𝑙𝑛 1 − 𝑃𝑅

Typical values and relationships of reference probabilities of exceedance and corresponding

return periods for a specific site.

Probability of exceedance PR Time span TL Mean return period TR

20% 10 years 45 years

10% 10 years 95 years

20% 50 years 224 years

10% 50 years 475 years

5% 50 years 975 years

10% 100 years 949 years

5% 100 years 1950 years

Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc Page 6 of 61

Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3

REDUCED DESIGN LIFE OF THE BUILDING

(EN1998-1,cl.2.1)

By reducing the remaining

lifetime of the building is reduced
the design ground acceleration

Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc Page 7 of 61

Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3

Peak ground acceleration attenuation relationships for the European area proposed by
Ambraseys et al. (1996)

Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc Page 8 of 61

Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3

SEISMIC ZONATION MAP

(CYS NA EN1998-1)

The seismic building code of Cyprus includes seismic zonation based on ground acceleration values
with 10% probability of exceedance in 50 years, i.e., 475years mean return period. Five zones (1-5)
are defined with PGA ranging from 0.075g to 0.15g. In a recent revision of the code (2004), three
seismic zones are defined.

Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc Page 9 of 61

 Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3

REQUIRED INPUT DATA – CHECK LIST

(EN1998-3,cl3.1, 3.2 & Annex A.2)
Check

Description of identification Parameter Results/Comment tick

II
Identification of “new” importance class
III

IV

Does the building design using any the Prior 1994

previous seismic code? After 1994

Construction date of building Date

Column

Present of peeling cracks If YES, provide Beam

Wall

Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc Page 10 of 61

 Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3

Slab

Sign of steel Column

Physical condition of reinforced concrete deterioration

Beam
elements and presence of any degradation,
due to carbonation, steel corrosion, etc. Wall

Slab

Vertical at mid-span
Beams
Diagonal at ends

Are there any significant cracks on Diagonal at ends (joints)

Columns
structural members Mid-span

Diagonal at ends (joints)

Walls
Mid-span

Measure crack width of basement walls If YES provide the crack width

Settlement of structure due to weak

If YES provide which side of the building have been settled
foundation

Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc Page 11 of 61

 Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3

Are there any presents of cracks of infill

If YES provide where
walls at the connection points

Is there any present of strengthening to the

If YES provide where
structural members

Regular in plan
Identification of the structural regularity
Regular in elevation

Column supported on beam

Continuity of load paths between lateral
resisting elements. Missing any structural member

Frame system

Dual system

Frame-equivalent dual system

Type of structural system
Wall equivalent dual system

Torsionally flexible system

Inverted pendulum system

Identification of the lateral resisting system Moment frame/wall system in X direction

Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc Page 12 of 61

 Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3

in both directions. Moment frame/wall system in Y direction

Distribution of infill walls Regular in plan

Identification of the type of building Raft foundation

foundation
Pad foundation

Pile foundation

Strip foundation

Is there any building attached? Attached YES/NO

If YES measure the gap between them

Change of existing usage.

Variable
If YES re-assess the variable load
Re-assessment if imposed
actions/permanent load. Installation of any further load (i.e.

Permanent antenna, board)

If YES re-assess the permanent load

Solid slab Thickness/dimensions

Type of slab
Flat slab Thickness/dimensions

Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc Page 13 of 61

 Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3

Waffle slab Thickness/dimensions

Ribbed slab Thickness/dimensions

Beams

Depth and width of concrete elements Columns

Walls

Width of flanges in T-beams If exist, measure the width

Possible eccentricities between beams and If eccentricities exist check if YES provide the distance (check
columns axes at joints. if e ≤ bc / 4).

Is there any asymmetric setbacks at all

If YES provide the distance from the previous storey
storeys

Is there any effects of short columns YES / NO

Is there any structural member run with

YES / NO
interruption from their foundation to top?

Is the ground floor is soft storey (pilotis) YES / NO

Identification of the ground conditions. A

Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc Page 14 of 61

 Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3

Column

Beam

Amount of longitudinal steel in beams, Slab

columns and walls.

Wall

Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc Page 15 of 61

 Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3

Column

Beam

Amount and detailing of confining steel in

critical regions and in beam-column joints.

Slab

Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc Page 16 of 61

 Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3

Wall

Amount of steel reinforcement in floor

slabs contributing to the negative resisting
bending moment of T-beams.

Column

Beam
Seating and support conditions of
horizontal elements.

Slab

Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc Page 17 of 61

 Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3

Wall

Column

Beam

Depth of concrete cover.

Slab

Wall

Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc Page 18 of 61

 Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3

Column

Beam

Lap-splices for longitudinal reinforcement.

Slab

Wall

Concrete strength. Column

Beam

Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc Page 19 of 61

 Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3

Slab

Wall

Column

Beam

Steel yield strength, ultimate strength and

Slab
ultimate strain.

Wall

Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc Page 20 of 61

Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3

DEFINITION OF KNOWLEDGE LEVEL

(EN1998-3,cl.3.3.2)

Factors Knowledge level KL1 Knowledge level KL2 Knowledge level KL3

The overall structural geometry and
member sizes are known either:
(a) from survey or
(b) from original outline
construction drawings used for both
the original construction and any
subsequent modifications.
Geometry In case (b), a sufficient sample of
dimensions of both overall geometry dimensions of both overall geometry
and member sizes should be
checked on site; if there are
significant discrepancies from the
outline construction drawings, a
fuller dimensional survey should be
performed.
The structural details are not known
from detailed construction drawings
Details
and may be assumed based on
simulated design in accordance with
The overall structural geometry and
member sizes are known either:
(a) from an extended survey or
(b) from outline construction
drawings used for both the original
construction and any subsequent
modifications.
In case (b), a sufficient sample of
and member sizes should be checked be checked on site; if there are significant
on site; if there are significant
discrepancies from the outline
construction drawings, a fuller
dimensional survey is required.
The structural details are known
either from extended in-situ
inspection or from incomplete
detailed construction drawings.
The overall structural geometry and
member sizes are known either:
(a) from a comprehensive survey or
(b) from the complete set of outline
construction drawings used for both the
original construction and any subsequent
modifications.
In case (b), a sufficient sample of both
overall geometry and member sizes should
discrepancies from the outline
construction drawings, a fuller
dimensional survey is required.
The structural details are known either
from comprehensive in-situ inspection or
from a complete set of detailed
construction drawings.

Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc Page 21 of 61

Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3
usual practice at the time of
construction;
In this case, limited inspections in
the most critical elements should be
performed to check that the
assumptions correspond to the actual
situation. Otherwise, more extensive
in-situ inspection is required.
No direct information on the
mechanical properties of the
construction materials is available,
either from original design
specifications or from original test
Materials
reports. Default values should be
assumed in accordance with
standards at the time of construction,
accompanied by limited in-situ
testing in the most critical elements.
Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc
In the latter case, limited in-situ
inspections in the most critical
elements should be performed to
check that the available information
corresponds to the actual situation.
Informationonthemechanicalproperti
esoftheconstructionmaterialsis
available either from extended in-
situ testing or from original design
specifications. In this latter case,
limited in-situ testing should be
performed.
In the latter case, limited in-situ
inspections in the most critical elements
should be performed to check that the
available information corresponds to the
actual situation.
Informationonthemechanicalpropertiesofth
econstructionmaterialsis available either
from comprehensive in-situ testing or
from original test reports. In this latter
case, limited in-situ testing should be
performed.
Page 22 of 61
Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3
Geometry: The properties
of the structural system, and
of such non-structural
elements (e.g. masonry infill
panels) as may affect
structural response
Limited knowledge
KL1
DETAILS
Simulated design in
accordance with relevant
practice
and
From limited in-situ
inspection
MATERIALS
Default values in
accordance with standards
of the time of construction
and
From limited in-situ testing
Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc
KNOWLEDGE LEVELS
(EN 1998-3,cl.3.3.1)
Knowledge levels
(EN 1998-3,cl.3.3.1)
Details: These include the amount and
detailing of reinforcement in reinforced
concrete, connections between steel
Material: The mechanical
members, the connection of floor
properties of the constituent
diaphragms to lateral resisting structure,
materials
the bond and mortar jointing of masonry
and the nature of any reinforcing
elements in masonry
Choose the
knowledge level
based on the
factors above
Normal knowledge Full knowledge
KL2 KL3
DETAILS DETAILS
From incomplete original From original detailed
detailed construction construction drawings with
drawings with limited in-situ limited in-situ inspection
inspection or
or From comprehensive in-
From extended in-situ situ inspection
inspection
MATERIALS
MATERIALS
From original design
From original test reports
specifications with limited
with limited in- situ testing
in- situ testing
or
or
From comprehensive in-
From extended in-situ
situ testing
testing
Page 23 of 61
Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3

LEVEL OF INSPECTION
(EN1998-3,cl.3.4.4)

YES
Is the Knowledge
Details & Materials level
KL1 ?
Note: if the masonry infill
walls are considered in
Does the spot check agree the model, certain
with the drawings/ NO sampling and testing for
assumptions ? shear and compressive
strength and for Elastic
Modulus make sense

YES NO

Inspection: 20% detail

check

Testing: 1 sample per

floor (beam/column,wall) Is the Knowledge
KL2 level KL3
KL2 or KL3 ?
Details Details

Does the spot check agree Does the spot check agree
with the drawings/ Are the with the drawings/ Are the
YES drawing available? YES drawing available?
NO NO

Limited Extended Limited Comprehesive

Inspection: 20% detail Inspection: 50% detail Inspection: 20% detail Inspection: 80% detail
check check check check

Materials Materials

Material properties are Material properties are

derived either from original derived either past test
specification or through in reports or through in situ
Specifictions situ sampling Sampling Test Reports sampling Sampling

Limited Extended Limited Comprehesive

Testing: 1 sample per Testing: 2 sample per Testing: 1 sample per Testing: 3 sample per
floor (beam/column,wall) floor (beam/column,wall) floor (beam/column,wall) floor (beam/column,wall)

Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc Page 24 of 61

Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3

SELECTED KNOWLEDGE LEVEL RELATED TO COST/PROCESS OF

INSPECTION

Low cost/process LIMITED KNOWLEDGE LEVEL

Medium cost/process
NORMAL KNOWLEDGE LEVEL
High cost/process

FULL KNOWLEDGE LEVEL

SELECTED KNOWLEDGE LEVEL RELATED TO COST SAVING OF

RETROFITTING

High cost LIMITED KNOWLEDGE LEVEL

Medium cost NORMAL KNOWLEDGE LEVEL

Low cost FULL KNOWLEDGE LEVEL

Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc Page 25 of 61

Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3

VALUES OF CONFIDENCE FACTOR

(EN1998-3,cl.3.3.1)
CONFIDENCE FACTOR
(CF)
(EN1998-3,cl.3.3.1(4))

Limited knowledge Normal knowledge Full knowledge

KL1 KL2 KL3

CF=1.4 CF=1.2 CF=1.0

Note: If the existing member has been strengthened the “Confidence factor” (CF) is applied only on its old
material.

Note: The “Confidence factor” (CF) is applied to each old materials (steel, concrete, infill masonry).

ANALYSIS TYPE
(EN1998-3,cl.3.3.1)
ANALYSIS TYPE
(EN1998-3,cl.3.3.1(4))

Is the Knowledge
YES level NO
KL1 ?

Lateral force (LF)

Lateral force (LF) or
or Modal Response Spectrum
Modal Response Spectrum (MRS)
(MRS) Or
(More conservative) Non-linear analysis
(Pushover/Time history)
(Less conservative)

Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc Page 26 of 61

Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3

LATERAL FORCE ANALYSIS REQUIREMENTS (LFA)

(EN1998-1-1cl. & EN1998-3,cl.4.4.2)

HORIZONTAL ELASTIC RESPONSE SPECTRUM

(ΕΝ1998-1-1,cl.3.2.2.2)
𝑇
0 ≤ 𝑇 ≤ 𝑇𝐵 : 𝑆𝑒 𝑇 = 𝑎𝑔 ∙ 𝑆 ∙ 1 + 𝑇 ∙ 𝜂 ∙ 2,5 − 1 (ΕΝ1998-1-1,Eq. 3.2)
𝐵

𝑇𝐵 ≤ 𝑇 ≤ 𝑇𝐶 : 𝑆𝑒 𝑇 = 𝑎𝑔 ∙ 𝑆 ∙ 𝜂 ∙ 2.5 (ΕΝ1998-1-1,Eq. 3.3)

𝑇𝐶
𝑇𝐶 ≤ 𝑇 ≤ 𝑇𝐷 : 𝑆𝑒 𝑇 = 𝑎𝑔 ∙ 𝑆 ∙ 𝜂 ∙ 2.5 (ΕΝ1998-1-1,Eq. 3.4)
𝑇

𝑇 𝐶 𝑇𝐷
𝑇𝐷 ≤ 𝑇 ≤ 4𝑠: 𝑆𝑒 𝑇 = 𝑎𝑔 ∙ 𝑆 ∙ 𝜂 ∙ 2.5 (ΕΝ1998-1-1,Eq. 3.5)
𝑇2

Damping viscous: ξ=5%

Damping correction factor η: 𝜂 = 10/ 5 + 𝜉 ≥ 0.55

Design ground acceleration on type A ground: ag=γI*agR

Parameters of Type 1 elastic response spectrum (Large magnitude M>5.5Hz)

(CYS NA EN1998-1-1,table 3.2)

Ground
S TB (s) TC (s) TD (s)
Type
A 1.0 0.15 0.4 2.0
B 1.2 0.15 0.5 2.0
C 1.15 0.20 0.6 2.0
D 1.35 0.20 0.8 2.0
E 1.4 0.15 0.5 2.0

Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc Page 27 of 61

Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3

VERTICAL ELASTIC RESPONSE SPECTRUM

(ΕΝ1998-1-1,cl.3.2.2.3)

The vertical component of seismic action is taken into account if the design ground acceleration in the vertical
direction, avg, exceeds 0.25g, and even then only in the following cases:

 for horizontal structural member spanning 20m or more,

 for horizontal cantilever components longer than 5m,
 for beams supporting columns,
 in based-isolated structures.

𝑇
0 ≤ 𝑇 ≤ 𝑇𝐵 : 𝑆𝑣𝑒 𝑇 = 𝑎𝑣𝑔 ∙ 1 + 𝑇 ∙ 𝜂 ∙ 3,0 − 1 (ΕΝ1998-1-1,Eq. 3.8)
𝐵

𝑇𝐵 ≤ 𝑇 ≤ 𝑇𝐶 : 𝑆𝑣𝑒 𝑇 = 𝑎𝑣𝑔 ∙ 𝜂 ∙ 3.0 (ΕΝ1998-1-1,Eq. 3.9)

𝑇𝐶
𝑇𝐶 ≤ 𝑇 ≤ 𝑇𝐷 : 𝑆𝑣𝑒 𝑇 = 𝑎𝑣𝑔 ∙ 𝜂 ∙ 3.0 (ΕΝ1998-1-1,Eq. 3.10)
𝑇

𝑇𝐶 𝑇𝐷
𝑇𝐷 ≤ 𝑇 ≤ 4𝑠: 𝑆𝑣𝑒 𝑇 = 𝑎𝑣𝑔 ∙ 𝜂 ∙ 3.0 (ΕΝ1998-1-1,Eq. 3.11)
𝑇2

Damping viscous: ξ=5%

Damping correction factor η: 𝜂 = 10/ 5 + 𝜉 ≥ 0.55

Design ground acceleration on type A ground: ag=γI*agR

Design ground acceleration in vertical direction: avg = avg/ag*agR*γI

Note: the value of S is not used in the above expression cause the vertical ground motion is not very much
affected by the underlying ground condition

Parameters values of vertical elastic response spectra (Large magnitude M>5.5Hz)

(CYS NA EN1998-1-1,cl NA2.8)

Spectrum avg/ag TB (s) TC (s) TD (s)

Type 1 0.90 0.05 0.15 1.0

Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc Page 28 of 61

Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3

COMBINATION OF SEISMIC MASS

(EN 1998-1-1,cl.3.2.4)
Type of Variable action Storey φ

Roof 1,0

Categories A-C1 Storeys with correlated occupancies 0.8

Independently occupied storeys 0.5

Categories A-F1 1.0

Category Specific Use ψ2
A Domestic and residential 0.3
B Office 0.3
C Areas for Congregation 0.6
D Shopping 0.6
E Storage 0.8
F Traffic < 30 kN vehicle 0.6
G Traffic < 160 kN vehicle 0.3
H Roofs 0
Snow, altitude < 1000 m 0
Wind 0
Requirements Values References
Combination coefficient for variable
𝜓Ei = 𝜙 ∙ 𝜓2i ΕΝ1998-1-1,Eq. 4.2
action
Combination of seismic mass Gk,j + 𝜓Ei Qk,i ΕΝ1998-1-1,Eq. 3.17

Requirements Values References

ST = 1.0 (S = S * ST)
If γI > 1.0 (i.e. III & IV)
EN1998-5, Annex A
Amplification factor for Slopes <15o
Cliffs height <30m
ST = 1.2 (S = S * ST) EN1998-5, Annex A

Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc Page 29 of 61

Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3

If γI > I (i.e. III & IV)

for Slopes 15o ≤ slope ≤ 30o Cliffs
height <30m
ST = 1.4 (S = S * ST)
If γI > 1.0 (i.e. III & IV)
EN1998-5, Annex A
for Slopes slope > 30o
Cliffs height <30m

(Bisch etal, 2011 – Lisbon)

Requirements Values References
Regular in plan YES / NO ΕΝ1998-1-1,table 4.1
Regular in elevation YES ΕΝ1998-1-1,table 4.1
CYS NA EN1998-1-1:Seismic
Ground acceleration 0.10-0.25g
zonation map
TYPE 1
Spectrum type EN1998-1-1,cl.3.2.2.2(2)P
(Large magnitude M>5.5Hz)
A,B,C,D,E
Ground type Normally type B or C can be used EN1998-1-1,cl.3.1.2(1)
normal condition
Lower bound factor for the horizontal λ = 0.85 if T1 ≤ 2TC and more than 2
design spectrum storey EN1998-1-1,cl.4.3.3.2.2(1Ρ)
λ=1.0 in all other case
Damped elastic response spectrum ξ = 5% EN1998-1-1,cl.3.2.2.2(1)P
T1≤4Tc
Fundamental period EN1998-1-1,cl.4.3.3.2.1(2)
T1≤2,0s

Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc Page 30 of 61

Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3

Accidental eccentricity See table below EN1998-1-1,cl.4.3.2

Base shear Fb=Sd(T1).mass.λ (EN1998-1-1,cl.4.3.3.2.2)

Horizontal seismic forces (according zi ∙ mi

Fi = Fb ∙ (EN 1998-1-1:2004, Eq. 4.11)
to height of the masses) zj ∙ mj

𝐹𝑖 = 𝛿 ∙ 𝐹𝑖
(Fi see above)
Accidental torsional effects 3D EN1998-1-1,cl.4.3.3.2.4(1)
Where:
𝑥
𝛿 = 1 + 0.6
If the accidental torsional effects as 𝐿𝑒
shown in table below (EN19981- 𝑀𝑎𝑖 = ∓𝑒𝑎𝑖 ∙ 𝛿𝐹𝑖
1,cl.4.3.2(1)P) is not taken into Where:
account the following rules can be 2D 𝑒𝑎𝑖 = ∓0.10𝐿𝑖
EN1998-1-1,cl.4.3.3.2.4(2)
use (regular in plan) Where
𝑥
𝛿 = 1 + 1.2
𝐿𝑒

Accidental torsional effect

(EN1998-1-1,cl.4.3.2)
Asymmetric distribution of
Percentage of accidental mass
Geometry of model (3D/2D)
eccentricity (i.e. infill walls)
(Regular/Irregular)
5% 3D Regular
10% 3D Irregular
20% 2D -
Requirements Values References
𝑀𝑎𝑖 = ∓𝑒𝑎𝑖 ∙ 𝐹𝑖
Torsional moment EN1998-1-1,cl.4.3.3.3.3(1)
For eai see the table above

Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc Page 31 of 61

Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3

Load case name Direction and Eccentricity % Eccentricity

EQXA X Dir + Eccen. Y As above
EQYA X Dir – Eccen. Y As above
EQXB Y Dir + Eccen. X As above
EQYB Y Dir – Eccen. X As above

Reference structure Period T1

Exact formula for Single Degree of Freedom Oscillator. Mass M lumped at

MH 3
top of a vertical cantilever of height H. Cantilever mass MB = 0. T1 = 2π
3EI

Exact formula for Single Degree of Freedom Oscillator. Vertical cantilever

0.24MB H 3
of height H and of total mass MB. T1 = 2π
3EI

Exact formula for Single Degree of Freedom Oscillator. Mass M lumped at

M + 0.24MB H 3
top of a vertical cantilever of height H and of total mass MB. T1 = 2π
3EI

Approximate Relationship (Eurocode 8).

Ct = 0,085 for moment resisting steel space frames Ct = 0,075 for T1 = Ct H 3/4
eccentrically braced steel frames
H building height in m measured
Ct = 0,050 for all other structures from foundation or top of rigid
basement.

Approximate Relationship (Eurocode 8).

d : elastic horizontal displacement of top of building in m under gravity T1 = 2 d

loads applied horizontally.

Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc Page 32 of 61

Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3

Modal Response Spectrum Analysis requirements (MRSA)

(EN1998-1-1cl. & EN1998-3,cl.4.4.2)

Requirements Values
Horizontal elastic response spectrum As above – see LFA
Vertical elastic response spectrum As above – see LFA
Amplification factor As above – see LFA
Seismic mass As above – see LFA

Requirements Values References

Regular in plan YES/NO ΕΝ1998-1-1,table 4.1
Regular in elevation NO ΕΝ1998-1-1,table 4.1
Structural model 2D/3D EN1998-1-1,cl.4.2.3.1(3)P
CYS NA EN1998-1-1:Seismic
Ground acceleration 0.10-0.25g
zonation map
TYPE 1
Spectrum type EN1998-1-1,cl.3.2.2.2(2)P
(Large magnitude M>5.5Hz)
A,B,C,D,E
Ground type Normally type B or C can be used EN1998-1-1,cl.3.1.2(1)
normal condition
Damped elastic response spectrum ξ = 5% EN1998-1-1,cl.3.2.2.2(1)P
Accidental eccentricity See table below EN1998-1-1,cl.4.3.2
ΣMx ≥ 90% of total mass
ΣMy ≥ 90% of total mass
Effective modal modes EN1998-1-1,cl.4.3.3.1(3)
Mx ≥ 5% of total mass
Mxy ≥ 5% of total mass
k ≥3.√n
(if eigenvalue analysis capture)
Minimum number of modes EN1998-1-1,cl.4.3.3.1(5)
k: is the number of modes
n: is the number of storey

Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc Page 33 of 61

Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3

Tk ≤ 0.20sec
Tk: is the period of vibration of mode
Period of vibration k EN1998-1-1,cl.4.3.3.1(5)
At least one natural period should be
below 0.20s
Tj ≤ 0.9 Ti SRSS
Fundamental period EN1998-1-1,cl.4.3.3.2.1(2)
Tj ≥ 0.9 Ti CQC
𝑀𝑎𝑖 = ∓𝑒𝑎𝑖 ∙ 𝐹𝑖
3D For eai see the table EN1998-1-1,cl.4.3.3.3.3(1)
below
𝑀𝑎𝑖 = ∓𝑒𝑎𝑖 ∙ 𝛿𝐹𝑖
Torsional moment Where:
2D
𝑒𝑎𝑖 = ∓0.10𝐿𝑖
(regular in EN1998-1-1,cl.4.3.3.2.4(2)
Where
plan)
𝑥
𝛿 = 1 + 1.2
𝐿𝑒

Accidental torsional effect

(EN1998-1-1,cl.4.3.2)
Asymmetric distribution of mass
Percentage of accidental
Geometry of model (3D/2D) (i.e. infill walls)
eccentricity
(Regular/Irregular)
5% 3D Regular
10% 3D Irregular
20% 2D -

Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc Page 34 of 61

Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3

q – factor approach analysis requirements

(ΕΝ1998-1-1,cl.3.2.2.2)

Design spectrum of elastic analysis

(ΕΝ1998-1-1,cl.3.2.2.5)
2 𝑇 2.5 2
0 ≤ 𝑇 ≤ 𝑇𝐵 : 𝑆𝑑 𝑇 = 𝑎𝑔 ∙ 𝑆 ∙ +𝑇 ∙ −3 (ΕΝ1998-1-1,Eq. 3.13)
3 𝐵 𝑞

2.5
𝑇𝐵 ≤ 𝑇 ≤ 𝑇𝐶 : 𝑆𝑑 𝑇 = 𝑎𝑔 ∙ 𝑆 ∙ (ΕΝ1998-1-1,Eq. 3.14)
𝑞

2.5 𝑇𝐶
𝑇𝐶 ≤ 𝑇 ≤ 𝑇𝐷 : 𝑆𝑑 𝑇 = 𝑎𝑔 ∙ 𝑆 ∙
𝑞 𝑇

≥ 𝛽 ∙ 𝑎𝑔 (ΕΝ1998-1-1,Eq. 3.15)

2.5 𝑇𝐶 𝑇𝐷
𝑇𝐷 ≤ 𝑇 ≤ 4𝑠: 𝑆𝑑 𝑇 = 𝑎𝑔 ∙ 𝑆 ∙ 𝑞 𝑇2

≥ 𝛽 ∙ 𝑎𝑔 (ΕΝ1998-1-1,Eq. 3.5)

Design ground acceleration on type A ground: ag=γI*agR

Lower bound factor for the horizontal spectrum: β=0.2

A value of q =1.5 for concrete structures (regardless of the structural system)

A value of q = 2.0 for steel structures (regardless of the structural system)

Parameters of Type 1 elastic response spectrum (Large magnitude M>5.5Hz)

(CYS NA EN1998-1-1,table 3.2)

Ground
S TB (s) TC (s) TD (s)
Type
A 1.0 0.15 0.4 2.0
B 1.2 0.15 0.5 2.0
C 1.15 0.20 0.6 2.0
D 1.35 0.20 0.8 2.0
E 1.4 0.15 0.5 2.0

Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc Page 35 of 61

Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3

Vertical elastic design spectrum

(ΕΝ1998-1-1,cl.3.2.2.5(5))

The vertical component of seismic action is taken into account if the design ground acceleration in the
vertical direction, avg, exceeds 0.25g, and even then only in the following cases:
 for horizontal structural member spanning 20m or more,
 for horizontal cantilever components longer than 5m,
 for beams supporting columns,
 in based-isolated structures.
2 𝑇 2.5 2
. 0 ≤ 𝑇 ≤ 𝑇𝐵 : 𝑆𝑑 𝑇 = 𝑎𝑣𝑔 ∙ +𝑇 ∙ −3 (ΕΝ1998-1-1,Eq. 3.13)
3 𝐵 𝑞
2.5
𝑇𝐵 ≤ 𝑇 ≤ 𝑇𝐶 : 𝑆𝑑 𝑇 = 𝑎𝑣𝑔 ∙ (ΕΝ1998-1-1,Eq. 3.14)
𝑞

2.5 𝑇𝐶
𝑇𝐶 ≤ 𝑇 ≤ 𝑇𝐷 : 𝑆𝑑 𝑇 = 𝑎𝑣𝑔 ∙
𝑞 𝑇
≥ 𝛽 ∙ 𝑎𝑣𝑔 (ΕΝ1998-1-1,Eq. 3.15)
2.5 𝑇𝐶 𝑇𝐷
𝑇𝐷 ≤ 𝑇 ≤ 4𝑠: 𝑆𝑑 𝑇 = 𝑎𝑣𝑔 ∙ 𝑞 𝑇2

≥ 𝛽 ∙ 𝑎𝑣𝑔 (ΕΝ1998-1-1,Eq. 3.5)

Design ground acceleration on type A ground: ag=γI*agR
Design ground acceleration in vertical direction: avg = avg/ag*agR*γI
For the vertical component of the seismic action the design spectrum is given by expressions (3.13) to
(3.16), with the design ground acceleration in the vertical direction, avg replacing ag, S taken as being
equal to 1,0 and the other parameters as defined in 3.2.2.3.
Parameters values of vertical elastic response spectra

(CYS NA EN1998-1-1,cl NA2.8)

Spectrum avg/ag TB (s) TC (s) TD (s)

Type 1 0.90 0.05 0.15 1.0
Special provisions:

 For the vertical component of the seismic action a behaviour factor q up to to 1,5 should generally
be adopted for all materials and structural systems.

Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc Page 36 of 61

Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3

Requirements Values
Amplification factor As above – see LFA
Seismic mass As above – see LFA
Analysis requirements As above – see MRSA
Accidental eccentricity As above – see MRSA
Regular in plan As above – see MRSA
Regular in elevation As above – see MRSA
Structural model As above – see MRSA
Ground acceleration As above – see MRSA
Spectrum type As above – see MRSA
Ground type As above – see MRSA
Damped elastic response spectrum As above – see MRSA
Accidental eccentricity As above – see MRSA
Effective modal modes As above – see MRSA
Minimum number of modes As above – see MRSA
Fundamental period As above – see MRSA
Torsional moment As above – see MRSA
Accidental torsional effect As above – see MRSA

Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc Page 37 of 61

 Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3

Linear Analysis - Requirements from EN1998-3

(EN1998-3,cl.4.4.2(1)P)
Requirements Values

Ductile mechanism (flexure) Brittle mechanism (Shear)

Demand Capacity Demand Capacity

(Di) (Ci) (Di) (Ci)
Acceptability of linear model
Di Verifications (if LM accepted)
(for checking of ρi = values)
Ci

From
In term of
analysis.
strength.
Use mean If ρi < 1: from
Use mean values
values of analysis
of properties. In term of
properties
strength.
Verifications (if LM accepted)
If ρi > 1: from
Ratio between demand and Use mean values
equilibrium with
capacity In term of of properties
strength of
EN1998-3cl.4.4.2(1)P strength. divided by CF and
From ductile e/m.
Use mean values by partial factor
analysis. Use mean values
of properties
of properties
divided by CF
multiplied by
CF.
Dseismic : is bending moment at the end member due to the seismic action
and the concurrent gravity load.

Cgravity : is the corresponding moment resistance, calculated on the basis of

the axial force due to gravity load alone and using mean-value properties
of old material from in-situ test.

Note: ρi=Dseismic/Cgravity

Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc Page 38 of 61

 Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3

Value of the ratio

ρmax/ρmin ρmax/ρmin = 2.5
(EN1998-3,cl.4.4.2(1P)

Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc Page 39 of 61

 Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3

Combination of seismic action

(EN1998-1-1cl. & EN1998-3,cl.4.4.2)

Seismic load combination for “Modal Analysis/Pushover”

SEISMIC 1. DL + ψEiLL + EQX + 0.3EQY

SEISMIC 2. DL + ψEiLL + EQX – 0.3EQY
SEISMIC 3. DL + ψEiLL - EQX + 0.3EQY
SEISMIC 4. DL + ψEiLL - EQX – 0.3EQY
SEISMIC 5. DL + ψEiLL + EQY + 0.3EQX
SEISMIC 6. DL + ψEiLL + EQY – 0.3EQX
SEISMIC 7. DL + ψEiLL - EQY + 0.3EQX
SEISMIC 8. DL + ψEiLL - EQY – 0.3EQX

Seismic load combination for “Lateral force Analysis/Pushover”

SEISMIC 1. DL + ψEiLL + EQXA + 0.3EQY

SEISMIC 2. DL + ψEiLL + EQXA – 0.3EQY
SEISMIC 3. DL + ψEiLL - EQXA + 0.3EQY
SEISMIC 4. DL + ψEiLL - EQXA – 0.3EQY
SEISMIC 5. DL + ψEiLL + EQYA + 0.3EQX
SEISMIC 6. DL + ψEiLL + EQYA – 0.3EQX
SEISMIC 7. DL + ψEiLL - EQYA + 0.3EQX
SEISMIC 8. DL + ψEiLL - EQY – 0.3EQX
SEISMIC 9. DL + ψEiLL + EQX + 0.3EQY
SEISMIC 10. DL + ψEiLL + EQX – 0.3EQY
SEISMIC 11. DL + ψEiLL - EQX + 0.3EQY
SEISMIC 12. DL + ψEiLL - EQX – 0.3EQY
SEISMIC 13. DL + ψEiLL + EQY + 0.3EQX
SEISMIC 14. DL + ψEiLL + EQY – 0.3EQX
SEISMIC 15. DL + ψEiLL - EQY + 0.3EQX
SEISMIC 16. DL + ψEiLL - EQY – 0.3EQX

Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc Page 40 of 61

 Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3

Non-linear Analysis – Pushover Analysis requirements

Requirements
Regular in plan
Regular in elevation
Structural model
Ground acceleration
Spectrum type
Ground type
Cracked elements
Material properties
Seismic action
Lateral loads derived from
Modal Response Spectrum Analysis
(EN1998-1-1cl. & EN1998-3,cl.4.4.2)
Values References
YES/NO ΕΝ1998-1-1,table 4.1
YES/NO ΕΝ1998-1-1,table 4.1
2D/3D EN1998-1-1,cl.4.3.3.1(9&10)P
CYS NA EN1998-1-1:Seismic
0.10-0.25g
zonation map
TYPE 1
EN1998-1-1,cl.3.2.2.2(2)P
(Large magnitude M>5.5Hz)
A,B,C,D,E
Normally type B or C can be used EN1998-1-1,cl.3.1.2(1)
normal condition
50% of the stiffness EN1998-1-1,cl.4.3.1(7)
Use mean values EN1998-1-1,cl.4.3.3.4.1(4)
Apply to the ∓ direction EN1998-1-1,cl.4.3.3.4.1(7)P
Lateral Force Analysis
or EN1998-1-1,cl.4.3.3.4.2.2(1)

Determination of the period 𝑚 ∙ 𝑑𝑦

𝑇 = 2𝜋 EN1998-1-1,Eq.B.7
for SDOF 𝐹𝑦

Determination of the
2
Target displacement for 𝑇
𝑑𝑒 = 𝑆𝑒 (𝑇) EN1998-1-1,Eq.B.8
SDOF 2𝜋

Accidental torsional effect

(EN1998-1-1,cl.4.3.2)
Percentage of accidental Asymmetric distribution of mass in
Geometry of model (3D/2D)
eccentricity plan

Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc Page 41 of 61

Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3

(i.e. infill walls)

(Regular/Irregular)
5% 3D Regular
10% 3D Irregular
20% 2D -

Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc Page 42 of 61

 Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3

Non linear Analysis - Requirements from EN1998-3

(EN1998-3,cl.4.4.2(1)P)
Requirements Values

Ductile mechanism (flexure) Brittle mechanism (Shear)

Demand Capacity Demand Capacity

(Di) (Ci) (Di) (Ci)
Ratio between demand
and capacity From analysis. In term of From analysis. In term of strength.

EN1998-3cl.4.4.2(1)P Use mean deformation. Use mean Use mean values of

values of Use mean values values of properties divided by
properties in of properties properties in CF and by partial
model. divided by CF. model. factor.
Plastic hinges
X & Y – direction (check separately)
∑ M Rc > ∑ M Rb , then plastic hinges will likely develop in beams and,
Case 1: At beams consequently, only the beams should be considered for the evaluation of
ρmax and ρmin.

∑ M Rc < ∑ M Rb , then plastic hinges will likely develop in columns and,

Case 2: At Columns thereby, only the columns should be considered for the evaluation of ρmax
and ρmin.

Lateral load
(EN1998-1-1,cl. 4.3.3.4.2.2(1))
Load pattern Description

A “uniform pattern”, corresponding to uniform unidirectional lateral

accelerations (i.e. Φi = 1) . It attempts to simulate the inertia forces in a
Uniform load pattern
potential soft-storey mechanism, limited in all likelihood to the bottom
storey, with the lateral drifts concentrated there and the storeys above
moving laterally almost as a rigid body.

Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc Page 43 of 61

Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3

Uniform load pattern

A “modal pattern”, simulating the inertia forces of the1st mode in the

horizontal direction in which the analysis is carried out. This pattern is
meant to apply in the elastic regime and during the initial stages of the
plastic mechanism development, as well as in a full-fledged beam-sway
mechanism

Modal load pattern

Modal load pattern

Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc Page 44 of 61

Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3

Capacity curve
(EN1998-1-1,cl. 4.3.3.4.2.3(1))
Relation between base shear force and the control displacement

Capacity curve (for each

analysis see below)

1. Pushover curve ends until a terminal point at 1.5 times the

“target displacement”.

Procedure for determination of the target displacement for nonlinear static (pushover) analysis
(EN1998-1,cl.Annex B)
Requirements Values References

Φi = 1 Uniform pattern
EN1998-1,cl.B.1
Normalized displacement Φi = Modal pattern

Calculated from Modal analysis

Natural period T calculated from linear elastic analysis -

Normalized lateral forces 𝐹𝑖 = 𝑚𝑖 Φi EN1998-1,Eq.B.1

Mass of an equivalent
𝑚∗ = 𝑚𝑖 𝜙𝑖 = 𝐹𝑖 EN1998-1,Eq.B.2
SDOF

Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc Page 45 of 61

 Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3

𝑚∗ 𝐹𝑖
Γ= 2 =
Transformation factor 𝑚𝑖 Φi 𝐹𝑖 2 EN1998-1,Eq.B.3
𝑚𝑖

EN1998-1-
Base shear 𝐹𝑏 = 𝑆d(𝑇1) ⋅ 𝑚 ⋅ λ
1,cl.3.2.2.2

𝐹𝑏
Force of SDOF 𝐹∗ = EN1998-1,Eq.B.4
Γ

𝑑𝑛
Displacement of SDOF 𝑑∗ = EN1998-1,Eq.B.5
Γ

∗ ∗ 𝐸𝑚 ∗
𝑑𝑦 = 2 𝑑𝑚 − ∗
𝐹𝑦

Yield displacement of the Note: The maximum displacement of structure is

EN1998-1,Eq.B.6
idealised SDOF system taken from the roof level at the node of centre of mass.
The top of a penthouse should not be considered as the
roof.

𝑚∗ ∙ 𝑑𝑦 ∗
Period 𝑇 = 2𝜋 EN1998-1,Eq.B.7
𝐹𝑦

Elastic acceleration
See section above “LFA” -
response spectrum, Se(T*)

Target displacement of the 2

∗ 𝑇∗ ∗
𝑑𝑒𝑡 = 𝑆𝑒(𝑇) EN1998-1,Eq.B.8
structure with period T* 2𝜋

Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc Page 46 of 61

 Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3

Target displacement

Short period range

EN1998-1,cl.B.5
(T* < Tc) 𝐹𝑦 ∗
≥ 𝑆𝑒 𝑇 ∗ 𝑑𝑡 ∗ ≥ 𝑑𝑒𝑡 ∗
𝑚∗

𝐹𝑦 ∗ 𝑑 𝑒𝑡 ∗ 𝑇𝐶
< 𝑆𝑒 𝑇 ∗ 𝑑𝑡 ∗ = 1 + 𝑞𝑢 − 1 ≥ 𝑑𝑒𝑡 ∗
𝑚∗ 𝑞𝑢 𝑇∗

𝑆𝑒 𝑇 ∗ 𝑚∗
𝑞𝑢 =
𝐹𝑦 ∗

Target displacement

Medium and long period EN1998-1,cl.B.5

range (T* ≥ Tc)

𝑇∗ 2
𝑑𝑡 ∗ = det ∗ = 𝑆𝑒(𝑇)∗ (≤3det*)
2𝜋

Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc Page 47 of 61

 Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3

Target displacement of
dt =Γdt* EN1998-1,Eq.B.13
MDOF

Torsional effects
(EN1998-1-1,cl.4.3.3.4.2.7)
Requirements 2D/3D Description References

This rule applied to the following

structural system:
Torsionally flexible structural type (i.e.
rx < Is see EN1998-1-1,cl.4.2.3.2, or, a
structure with a predominantly torsional
1st or 2nd mode of vibration in one of the
Torsional effects two orthogonal horizontal direction). EN1998-1-
3D model
requirements - Displacement at the stiff/strong 1,cl.4.3.3.4.2.7(1)P
side are under estimated compared
to the flexible weak side in plan
(i.e. is the side which developed
smaller displacement under static
load parallel to it) shall be
increased
𝑀𝑎𝑖 = ∓𝑒𝑎𝑖 ∙ 𝛿𝐹𝑖
EN1998-1-
Where:
1,cl.4.3.3.2.4(2)
2D model 𝑒𝑎𝑖 = ∓0.10𝐿𝑖
Torsional effects EN1998-1-
(regular (see table above)
requirements EN1998-1- 1,cl.4.3.3.4.2.7(3)
in plan) Where
1,cl.4.3.2(1)P
𝑥
𝛿 = 1 + 1.2
𝐿𝑒
Procedure for determine the increased displacement of strong/stiff side
Procedure for determine the increased displacement of strong/stiff side can be found in the Designer’s
Guide to EN1998-1 and EN1998-5 in p. 57

Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc Page 48 of 61

Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3
Number of Analysis required (Pushover)
X & Y – main directions
Directions X – direction
“modal” towards (+) positive
“modal” towards (-) negative X
Analysis number
“uniform” towards (+) positive X
“uniform” towards (-) negative X
Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc
Y - direction
“modal” towards (+) positive Y
“modal” towards (-) negative Y
“uniform” towards (+) positive Y
“uniform” towards (-) negative Y
Page 49 of 61
 Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3

Modeling Aspects
(EN1998-1-1,cl.4.3.1)
Requirements Values References
The strength and stiffness of secondary seismic
Secondary
elements, against lateral actions may in general be EN1998-3,cl.4.3(3)P
elements
neglected in the analysis
Material properties Use mean values of material properties EN1998-3,cl.4.3(5)P
All lateral components should be connected by
Lateral components EN1998-1-1,cl.4.3.1(3)
horizontal diaphragms
Floor diaphragms may taken as being rigid in their
planes, mass and moments inertia may be lumped at
the centre of gravity.
Neglect the rigid diaphragm assumption for the
following cases:
1. not compact configuration and plan view far
Floor diaphragms EN1998-1-1,cl.4.3.1(4)
from rectangular.
2. large openings in floor slabs, due to internal
patios or stairways.
3. large distance between strong and stiff vertical
elements compared to the transverse dimension
of the diaphragm.
Structural Criteria for regularity are play significant role to the
EN1998-1-1,cl.4.3.1(5)
regularity type of modeling and analysis
No use of the modification for un-crack cross-section
(50% EI). Not OK in displacement-based assessment
Crack analysis (unconservative for displacement demands). OK in EN1998-1-1,cl.4.3.1(6&7)
force-based design of new buildings (conservative
for force
Infill walls which contribute significally to the lateral
Infill walls stiffness and resistance of the building should be taken EN1998-1-1,cl.4.3.1(8)
into account

Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc Page 50 of 61

 Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3

The deformability of the foundation shall be taken into

Foundation EN1998-1-1,cl.4.3.1(9)
account in the model

Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc Page 51 of 61

Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3

Seismic assessment of Reinforced Concrete buildings

(EN1998-3,Annex A)

Partial factors
Requirements Values References
Partial factor for steel γs = 1.15 CYS EN1992-1-1,table 2.1
reinforcement
Partial factor of concrete γc = 1.5 CYS EN1992-1-1,table 2.1
Permanent action γG = 1.35 EN1990,cl.6.4.3.2
Variable action γQ = 1.5 EN1990,cl.6.4.3.2

Limit State of near collapse (NC)

Requirements Values References

Factor for structural 𝛾𝑒𝑙 = 1.5 (primary members)

element EN1998-3,cl.A.3.2.2(1)
primary/secondary 𝛾𝑒𝑙 = 1.0 (secondary members)

Ratio moment/shear at
𝐿𝑣 = 𝑀/𝑉 EN1998-3,cl.A.3.2.2(1)
the end section

𝑁
Design axial force 𝑣= EN1998-3,cl.A.3.2.2(1)
𝑏 ∙ 𝑕 ∙ 𝑓𝑐

Mechanical Mechanical ratio

reinforcement ratio of 𝜌1 + 𝜌𝑣 𝑓𝑦𝐿 of tension fc : uniaxial (cylindrical)
𝜔‫= ׳‬
the tension and 𝑓𝑐 longitudinal concrete strength (MPa)
compression of reinforcement

Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc Page 52 of 61

Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3

longitudinal
Mechanical ratio
reinforcement, ω,ω‫׳‬
𝜌2 𝑓𝑦𝐿 of compression
𝜔=
𝑓𝑐 longitudinal
reinforcement
0.3
Modulus of Elasticity 𝑓𝑐𝑚
𝐸𝑐𝑚 = 22 EN1992-1-1,table 3.1
(as for new members) 10

Concrete compressive 𝑓𝑐
𝑓𝑐 =
strength 𝐶𝐹
EN1998-3,cl.A.3.2.2(1)
𝑓𝑦
Stirrup Yield strength 𝑓𝑦𝑤 =
𝐶𝐹

Ratio of transverse 𝐴𝑠𝑥

𝜌𝑠𝑥 =
steel parallel to the 𝑏𝑤 ∙ 𝑠𝑕 EN1998-3,cl.A.3.2.2(1)
direction x of loading sh : stirrup spacing

Confinement 𝑠𝑕 𝑠𝑕 𝑏𝑖 2
𝑎 = 1− 1− 1− EN1998-3,cl.A.3.2.2(1)
effectiveness factor 2𝑏𝑜 2𝑕𝑜 6𝑕𝑜 ∙ 𝑏𝑜
Total chord rotation Elastic plus inelastic part
capacity
See the equation below: Beams & Columns (elastic plus inelastic part
0.225 0.35 𝑓𝑦𝑤
1 𝑚𝑎𝑥 0.01; 𝜔‫׳‬ 𝐿𝑣 𝑎𝜌 𝑠𝑥
𝜃𝑢𝑚 = 0.016 ∙ 0. 3𝑣 𝑓 𝑚𝑖𝑛 9; 25 𝑓𝑐 1.25100𝜌 𝑑
𝛾𝑒𝑙 𝑚𝑎𝑥 0.01; 𝜔 𝑐 𝑕

Total chord rotation

Walls: 𝜃𝑢𝑚 = 0.58 ∙ 𝜃𝑢𝑚 EN1998-3,cl.A.3.2.2(1)
capacity
For cold-work brittle 𝜃𝑢𝑚
𝜃𝑢𝑚 = EN1998-3,cl.A.3.2.2(1)
steel 1.6

Members without 𝜃𝑢𝑚

𝜃𝑢𝑚 =
detail for earthquake 1.2 EN1998-3,cl.A.3.2.2(3)
resistance
Total chord rotation
Plastic part
capacity

Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc Page 53 of 61

Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3

See the equation below: Beams & Columns (elastic plus inelastic part

0.3 0.35 𝑓𝑦𝑤

𝑝𝑙 1 𝑚𝑎𝑥 0.01; 𝜔‫׳‬ 0.2 𝐿𝑣 𝑎𝜌 𝑠𝑥
𝜃𝑢𝑚 = 0.0145 ∙ 0. 25𝑣 𝑓𝑐 𝑚𝑖𝑛 9, 25 𝑓𝑐 1.275100𝜌 𝑑
𝛾𝑒𝑙 𝑚𝑎𝑥 0.01; 𝜔 𝑕

Factor for structural element 𝛾𝑒𝑙 = 1.8 (primary members)

EN1998-3,cl.A.3.2.2(2)
primary/secondary 𝛾𝑒𝑙 = 1.0 (secondary members)
Total chord rotation capacity Walls: 𝜃𝑢𝑚 𝑝𝑙 = 0.6 ∙ 𝜃𝑢𝑚 𝑝𝑙 EN1998-3,cl.A.3.2.2(2)
𝜃𝑢𝑚
For cold-work brittle steel 𝜃𝑢𝑚 = EN1998-3,cl.A.3.2.2(2)
2.0
Members without detail for 𝜃𝑢𝑚 𝜃𝑢𝑚 𝑝𝑙
𝜃𝑢𝑚 = , 𝜃𝑢𝑚 = EN1998-3,cl.A.3.2.2(3)
earthquake resistance 1.2 1.2
Total chord rotation capacity If 𝑙𝑜 < 𝑙𝑜𝑢 ,𝑚𝑖𝑛 =>
𝑙𝑜 EN1998-3,cl.A.3.2.2(4)
𝜃𝑢𝑚 𝑝𝑙 = 𝜃𝑢𝑚 𝑝𝑙 𝑙 𝑜𝑢 ,𝑚𝑖𝑛

Requirements for lamping zone of longitudinal bars

Actual lamping ratio

(at the zone of 𝜌 = 2𝜌 EN1998-3,cl.A.3.2.2(4)
overlapping)

1 − 𝑠𝑕 1 − 𝑠𝑕 𝑛𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑟
𝑎1 = ∙ ∙
2𝑏𝑜 2𝑕𝑜 𝑛𝑡𝑜𝑡

nrestr : number of lapped longitudinal bars

laterally restrained by a stirrup corner or
Minimum lamping
cross-tie. EN1998-3,cl.A.3.2.2(4)
length
ntot : total number of lapped longitudinal
bars along the cross-section perimeter.

𝑑𝑏𝑙 ∙ 𝑓𝑦𝐿
𝑙𝑜𝑢 ,𝑚𝑖𝑛 = ∙ 𝑓𝑐
𝑓𝑦𝑤
1.05 + 14.5𝑎1 𝜌𝑠𝑥
𝑓𝑐

Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc Page 54 of 61

Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3

Shear strength

Area of cross section 𝐴𝑐 = 𝑏𝑤 𝑑 EN1998-3,cl.A.3.3.1(1)

Concrete compressive 𝑓𝑐𝑘
𝑓𝑐 = EN1992-1-1,cl.3.1.6(1)
strength 𝛾𝐶
Factor for structural 𝛾𝑒𝑙 = 1.15 (primary members) EN1998-3,cl.A.3.3.1(1)
element EN1998-3,cl.A.3.3.1(1)
𝛾𝑒𝑙 = 1.0 (secondary members)
primary/secondary
Contribution of Rectangular 𝑉𝑤 = 𝜌𝑤 𝑏𝑤 𝑧𝑓𝑦𝑤
transverse reinforcement 𝜋 𝐴𝑠𝑤 EN1998-3,cl.A.3.3.1(1)
Circular 𝑉𝑤 = 𝑓 𝐷 − 2𝑐
to shear resistance 2 𝑠 𝑦𝑤
Shear resistance after See below: EN1998-3,cl.A.3.3.1(1)
flexural yielding, as
controlled by stirrups
1 𝑕−𝑥
𝑉𝑅 = 𝑚𝑖𝑛 𝑁; 0.55𝐴𝑐 𝑓𝑐 + 1 − 0.05𝑚𝑖𝑛 5; 𝜇∆𝑝𝑙
𝛾𝑒𝑙 2𝐿𝑣
𝐿𝑣
∙ 0.16𝑚𝑎𝑥 0.5; 100𝜌𝑡𝑜𝑡 1 − 0.16𝑚𝑖𝑛 5; 𝑓𝑐 𝐴𝑐 + 𝑉𝑤
𝑕

Shear resistance as controlled

by web crushing (diagonal See below: EN1998-3,cl.A.3.3.1(2&3)
compression)

Before flexural yielding (𝜇∆𝑝𝑙 = 0), or after flexural yielding (cyclic 𝜇∆𝑝𝑙 > 0)

Walls 0.85 1 − 0.06𝑚𝑖𝑛 5; 𝜇∆𝑝𝑙 𝑁

𝑉𝑅,𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 1 + 1.8𝑚𝑖𝑛 0.15; 1
𝛾𝑒𝑙 𝐴𝑐 𝑓𝑐

𝐿𝑣
+ 0.25𝑚𝑎𝑥 1.75; 100𝜌𝑡𝑜𝑡 1 − 0.2𝑚𝑖𝑛 2; 𝑓𝑐 𝑏𝑤 𝑧
𝑕

Columns Lv / h ≤ 2 after flexural yielding (cyclic 𝜇∆𝑝𝑙 > 0

Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc Page 55 of 61

Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3

4/7 1 − 0.02𝑚𝑖𝑛 5; 𝜇∆𝑝𝑙

𝑉𝑅,𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 1 + 0.45 100𝜌𝑡𝑜𝑡 𝑚𝑖𝑛 40; 𝑓𝑐 𝑏𝑤 𝑧 𝑠𝑖𝑛2𝛿
𝛾𝑒𝑙

where:

𝑡𝑎𝑛𝛿 = 𝑕/2𝐿𝑣

Beam column joint

Requirements Values References

Overstrength factor 𝛾𝑅𝑑 = 1.2 EN1998-1-

1,cl.5.5.2.3(2)
Interior 𝑉𝑗 𝑕𝑑 = 𝛾𝑅𝑑 𝐴𝑠1 + 𝐴𝑠2 𝑓𝑦𝑑 − 𝑉𝐶
Shear force acting of the joint EN1998-1-
joint Exterior 𝑉𝑗 𝑕𝑑 = 𝛾𝑅𝑑 𝐴𝑠1 𝑓𝑦𝑑 − 𝑉𝐶 1,cl.5.5.2.3(2)
joint
𝑣𝑑
𝑉𝑗 𝑕𝑑 = 𝜂𝑓𝑐𝑑 1 − 𝑏𝑕
𝜂 𝑗 𝑗𝑐
EN1998-1-
Shear capacity of joint
Where 1,cl.5.5.3.3(2)
𝑓𝑐𝑘
𝜂 = 0.6 1 −
250
Shear strength See above (NC) EN1998-
3,cl.A.3.3.1(1)

Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc Page 56 of 61

Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3

Limit State of Significant Damage (SD)

Requirements Values References
3 EN1998-
Chord rotation capacity 𝜃𝑢𝑚 = 𝜃𝑢𝑚 ∙
4 3,cl.A.3.2.3(1)
Shear strength (Beams & Columns)

The verification against the exceedance of these two LS is not required, unless these two LS are the
only ones to be checked. In that case NC requirements applies.
Beam column joint
Requirements Values References

The verification against the exceedance of these two limit state SD and DL is not required, unless
these two LS are only ones to be checked. In that case NC requirements applies.

Limit State of Damage Limitation (DL)

Requirements Values References

Design shear resistance (EC2)

Value of vmin 𝑣𝑚𝑖𝑛 = 0.035𝑘 3/2 𝑓𝑐𝑘 0.5 EN1992-1-1,cl.6.2.2(1)

Design compressive 𝑓𝑐𝑘

𝑓𝑐𝑑 = EN1992-1-1,cl.3.1.6(1)
strength 𝛾𝐶
Compressive stress in the 𝑁𝐸𝑑
𝜍𝑐𝑝 = ≤ 0.2𝑓𝑐𝑑 EN1992-1-1,cl.6.2.2(1)
concrete from axial load 𝐴𝑐
Reinforcement ratio for 𝐴𝑠𝑖
𝜌𝐼 = ≤ 0.02 EN1992-1-1,cl.6.2.2(1)
longitudinal reinforcement 𝑏𝑤 𝑑

Coefficient factor k1 𝑘1 = 0.44 EN1992-1-1,cl.5.5(4)

200
Coefficient factor k 𝑘 = 1+ ≤ 2,0 EN1992-1-1,cl.6.2.2(1)
𝑑

1.3
Shear 𝑉𝑅𝑑,𝑐 = 𝐶𝑅𝑑 ,𝑐 𝑘 100𝜌𝐼 𝑓𝑐𝑘 + 𝑘1 𝜍𝑐𝑝 EN1992-1-1,cl.6.2.2(1)

Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc Page 57 of 61

Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3

𝑉𝑅𝑑,𝑐𝑚𝑖𝑛 = 𝑣𝑚𝑖𝑛 + 𝑘1 𝜍𝑐𝑝 𝑏𝑤 𝑑

𝑎𝑣 = 1 when My > LvVRd.c
Tension shift, αv
𝑎𝑣 = 0 when My < LvVRd.c
Chord rotation
Lever arm, z 𝑧 = 𝑑 − 𝑑‫׳‬ 𝑧 ≈ 0.95𝑑
Lever arm, z
(for rectangular wall 𝑧 = 0.8𝑕 -
section)
𝑓𝑦
Strain , εy 𝜀𝑦 = EN1998-3,cl.A.3.2.4(2)
𝐸𝑠

𝐿𝑣 + 𝑎𝑣 𝑧 𝑕 𝜀𝑦 𝑑𝑏𝐿 𝑓𝑦
𝜃𝑦 = 𝜑𝑦 + 0.0014 1 + 1.5 +
3 𝐿𝑣 𝑑 − 𝑑‫ ׳‬6 𝑓𝑐
Note:
Beams/Columns 𝑙𝑜
𝜀𝑦 = 𝜀𝑦 𝑙 for 𝑙𝑜 < 𝑙𝑜𝑦 ,𝑚𝑖𝑛
𝑜𝑦 ,𝑚𝑖𝑛

and
𝑙𝑜
𝑀𝑦 = 𝑀𝑦 𝑙 for 𝑙𝑜 < 𝑙𝑜𝑦 ,𝑚𝑖𝑛
𝑜𝑦 ,𝑚𝑖𝑛

𝐿𝑣 + 𝑎𝑣 𝑧 𝜀𝑦 𝑑𝑏𝐿 𝑓𝑦
𝜃𝑦 = 𝜑𝑦 + 0.0013 +
3 𝑑 − 𝑑‫ ׳‬6 𝑓𝑐
Note:
Walls of rectangular, T or
𝑙𝑜
barbelled section 𝜀𝑦 = 𝜀𝑦 𝑙 for 𝑙𝑜 < 𝑙𝑜𝑦 ,𝑚𝑖𝑛
𝑜𝑦 ,𝑚𝑖𝑛

and
𝑙𝑜
𝑀𝑦 = 𝑀𝑦 for 𝑙𝑜 < 𝑙𝑜𝑦 ,𝑚𝑖𝑛
𝑙 𝑜𝑦 ,𝑚𝑖𝑛

Alternative expressions
Beams 𝐿𝑣 + 𝑎𝑣 𝑧 𝑕 𝑑𝑏𝐿 𝑓𝑦
𝜃𝑦 = 𝜑𝑦 + 0.0014 1 + 1.5 + 𝜑𝑦
3 𝐿𝑣 8 𝑓𝑐
Columns
Note:

Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc Page 58 of 61

Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3

𝑙𝑜
𝑀𝑦 = 𝑀𝑦 𝑙 for 𝑙𝑜 < 𝑙𝑜𝑦 ,𝑚𝑖𝑛
𝑜𝑦 ,𝑚𝑖𝑛

𝐿𝑣 + 𝑎𝑣 𝑧 𝑑𝑏𝐿 𝑓𝑦
𝜃𝑦 = 𝜑𝑦 + 0.0013 + 𝜑𝑦
3 8 𝑓𝑐
Walls of rectangular, T or
barbelled section Note:
𝑙𝑜
𝑀𝑦 = 𝑀𝑦 𝑙 for 𝑙𝑜 < 𝑙𝑜𝑦 ,𝑚𝑖𝑛
𝑜𝑦 ,𝑚𝑖𝑛

Requirements for lamping zone of longitudinal bars

Actual lamping ratio (at the
𝜌 = 2𝜌 EN1998-3,cl.A.3.2.4(3)
zone of overlapping)
Lap length 𝑙𝑜 ≥ 15𝑑𝑏𝐿 EN1998-3,cl.A.3.2.4(4)
𝑓𝑦𝐿
𝑙𝑜𝑦 ,𝑚𝑖𝑛 = 0.3𝑑𝑏𝐿
Minimum length of lap 𝑓𝑐
splice for existing concrete EN1998-3,cl.A.3.2.4(3)
members fc and fyL are derived from the mean
values multiplied by the CF
Shear strength
The verification against the exceedance of these two LS is not required, unless these two LS are the
only ones to be checked. In that case NC requirements applies.
Beam column joint
Requirements Values References
The verification against the exceedance of these two limit state SD and DL is not required, unless
these two LS are only ones to be checked. In that case NC requirements applies.

Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc Page 59 of 61

Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3

Summary table
Limit State (LS)
Member Damage Limitation Significant damage Near Collapse
(DL) (SD) (NC)
Ductile primary
𝜃𝑠𝑑 ≤ 0.75𝜃𝑢 ,𝑚 −𝜍 𝜃𝑠𝑑 ≤ 𝜃𝑢,𝑚 −𝜍
(flexural)
𝜃𝑠𝑑 ≤ 𝜃𝑦
Ductile secondary
𝜃𝑠𝑑 ≤ 0.75𝜃𝑢𝑚 𝜃𝑠𝑑 ≤ 𝜃𝑢𝑚
(flexural)
Brittle primary 𝑉𝑅𝑑 ,𝐸𝐶8
𝑉𝐸,𝐶𝐷 ≤ 𝑉𝑅𝑑.𝐸𝐶2 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑉𝐸,𝐶𝐷 ≤ ; 𝐽𝑜𝑖𝑛𝑡: 𝑉𝐶𝐷 ≤ 𝑉𝑅𝑑𝑗𝐸𝐶 8
(shear) 1.15

Brittle secondary
𝑉𝑅𝑑 ,𝐸𝐶8
𝑉𝐸,𝐶𝐷 ≤ 𝑉𝑅𝑑.𝐸𝐶2 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑉𝐸,𝐶𝐷 ≤ ; 𝐽𝑜𝑖𝑛𝑡: 𝑉𝐶𝐷 ≤ 𝑉𝑅𝑑𝑗𝐸𝐶 8
1.15
(Shear)

θE, VE: chord-rotation & shear force demand from analysis;

VE,CD : from capacity design; θy: chord-rotation at yielding
θum: expected value of ultimate chord rotation under cyclic loading, calculated using mean
strengths for old materials divided by the confidence factor and nominal strengths for new
materials.
θu,m-σ: mean-minus-sigma ult. chord rotation =θum /1.5, or =θy+θplum/1.8
VRd, VRm: shear resistance, w/ or w/o material safety & confidence factor
VR,EC8: shear resistance in cyclic loading after flex. yielding

Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc Page 60 of 61

Design notes for Seismic Assessment to Eurocode 8 - Part 3

GENERAL CONSEQUENCE OF USE EUROCODE 8-PART 3

1.
PERFORMANCE
REQUIREMENT
&
CRITERIA

2.
APPLICABILITY
CONDITIONS OF THE
FOUR ANALYSIS
METHODS

3.
TYPE OF VERIFICATIONS
FOR DUCTILE AND
BRITTLE MODES OF
BEHAVIOUR AND
FAILURE

4.
COLLECTION OF
INFORMATION FOR THE
ASSESSMENT AND ITS
IMPLICATIONS

5a. 5b.
5c.
CONCRETE STEEL OR COMPOSITE
MASONRY BUILDINGS
STRUCTURES STRUCTURES

Valentinos Neophytou BEng (Hons), MSc Page 61 of 61